“Hamas is both the instigator of the war in Gaza—the result of its Oct. 7 assault on Israel—and the main obstacle to a cease-fire. But Netanyahu is not eager for an armistice either, certainly not before his army destroys Hamas as a political and military entity—a goal that many of his own generals see as infeasible. In his hourlong address to Congress last week, he repeated his cry for ‘total victory’ without so much as mentioning the talks—making [it] very clear that he has no interest in even feigning a desire for a diplomatic breakthrough.”

‍Fred Kaplan, Slate

“At other crisis points over the last 10 months – such as in April, when Iran launched its first ever direct military attack on Israel after the assassination of one of its commanders in Damascus – an all-out regional war has been avoided. The players have calculated their responses. That should not offer false reassurance; rather, each incident increases the risks. Each move may be calibrated, yet they are set at a higher notch than before.”

‍Editorial Board, The Guardian

Some argue, “[These attacks] should, if anything, be a relief. Israel has drawn blood in pinpoint strikes as an alternative to the wholesale attempted dismemberment of Hezbollah through ground invasion or all-out war. Coordinated assassinations send the message that Hezbollah’s leaders, and the leaders of other groups that depend on Iran’s funding and protection, remain alive only because Israel has not yet decided to kill them…

“That message would certainly make an impression on me, if I were dependent on Iran’s protection. I would be less inclined to escalate, and more inclined to declare this round of violence concluded. Iran is naturally mortified that it could not protect its vassal even in Tehran, and it will seek revenge. But it has tried to avoid all-out war for years. To start one now would be an extreme gamble, at a time when Israel has just given Iran reason to doubt that fortune favors it.”

‍Graeme Wood, The Atlantic